# Gavin Andresen
# 2011-08-09 15:18:40
# https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6428.msg443377#msg443377

Everybody likes this feature, and it feels like it is very close to being ready for inclusion. @p{par}

There are two reasonable requests in this thread that I think should be implemented before this is pulled: @p{par}

1. Pieter's change to the API, so the @p{lt}pubkey@s{gt} is extracted/verified from @p{brk}
  verifymessage @p{lt}bitcoinaddress@s{gt} @p{lt}signature@s{gt} @p{lt}message@s{gt} @p{par}

2. ByteCoin's request that the @p{lt}signature@s{gt} be industry-standard-base64-encoded instead of hex or base58 encoded. @p{par}

 @p{brk}
The nonce/no-nonce argument seems like "angels dancing on the head of a pin" to me; seems to me the tiny iota of theoretical added security (...sometime in the future maybe when SHA256 is broken or partly broken...) isn't worth the extra complexity.